bvandeusenandClaude Opus 5
bfc4f9cec9
CI / lint (push) Successful in 3s
Build images / sign-extension (push) Successful in 3s
CI / extension-version (push) Successful in 3s
Build images / build-agent (push) Successful in 7s
Build images / build-ml (push) Successful in 7s
Build images / build-web (push) Successful in 8s
CI / frontend-build (push) Successful in 20s
extension / lint (push) Successful in 18s
CI / backend-lint-and-test (push) Successful in 37s
CI / integration (push) Successful in 1m45s
extension / lint (pull_request) Successful in 24s
Milestone 362, enabling step 2's verification and everything after it. The weekly refresh was testable once a week. That is not a cadence anything can be developed against, and milestone 362's whole point is a gate — which has to be watched rejecting something before anyone can believe it is wired up. So `refresh` joins `force_build` as a dispatch input, on the same reasoning that added that one (#3252: confirm #3190 was gone rather than wait for it to recur). Adding it meant confronting that "is this a refresh?" was asked in five places and spelled five ways: `github.event_name == 'schedule'` in an `if:`, `$GITHUB_EVENT_NAME` in one shell, an `EVENT:` env passed into another, and a bare expression on `pull:`. Five spellings of one fact is how half of them come to disagree once somebody adds a sixth trigger — which is precisely what this commit is. So it is derived once at the top, next to BUILD_REF, which already exists for exactly this reason on exactly this question. String comparison, not boolean: Forgejo delivers dispatch inputs as strings, so `inputs.refresh` is 'true'/'false' and `&&` on it would read the string 'false' as truthy. **A constraint this makes visible, which pre-dates it.** A refresh checks out `main` (BUILD_REF) while running the workflow definition from the branch that triggered it — the cron registers from the default branch. So dev's workflow builds main's source, and dev's workflow cannot depend on anything main's tree does not have yet. It does now: the reuse step calls `artifacts.sh epoch`, which lands on main with this batch. Until then a refresh dispatch fails loudly at that call, which is the right failure — the alternative is tolerating a missing epoch and silently rebuilding #3265 into every refresh. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com> Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01TTjbZZ6JirCMSaJzQV1RhA